Infant mental health, child maltreatment, and the law: A jurisprudent therapy analysis.

Abstract

Scholarly and clinical discussions of the legal issues facing infant mental health professionals typically focus on the seemingly intractable differences in philosophies, goals, and approaches inherent in the law and the mental health professions. We argue that forensically informed approaches to practice with very young children can potentially enhance many mental health and child welfare outcomes. This article describes the relatively new conceptual frameworks known as "therapeutic jurisprudence" and "jurisprudent therapy." Using these conceptual frameworks, we analyze representative problems that are typical in infant mental health practice with maltreated children through case examples drawn from their evaluations of children and families in the child protection and legal systems. Demonstrations of how such dilemmas can be approached with enhanced analytic decision-making and practice approaches are presented. We argue that applying such jurisprudent therapy approaches opens up fresh perspectives for evidence-based practices that facilitate creative, rigorous, and intellectually stimulating clinical work.